Posted on 30. Jun, 2011 by in News

In the last few years standards in bouldering have exploded. In 1998 doing the first ascent of a V10 would get your photograph in a magazine, and now it is hardly worth blogging about. Today it seems that perhaps a V15 first ascent will garner some attention but little else. Ascending a V13 gets your name in the news cycle for a day. The trend in climbing is that the test-pieces of today are the warmups of tomorrow. This has gone on throughout the history of our young sport. Clearly there are a lot of reasons for this: The advent of gyms, the incredible amount of beta available via the internet, the sheer numbers of people participating in bouldering.

It is also now possible to make a living being a professional climber, and even a decent one at that. I imagine top athletes in climbing make well over 6 figures and as events like Adventures NYC in New York City seem to indicate, the popularity of climbing is only growing. With increased monetary attention and increased participation (which increases competition) is it then ridiculous to suggest that steroid use in our strength based sport will become an issue in the next ten years?

Clearly in climbing competitions, testing for the drug should become mandatory, as is done in most major sports. Interestingly enough, rigorous testing hasn’t prevented athletes in almost every other major sport to try and use performance enhancing drugs. Roger Clemens, Barry Bonds, Jose Canseco are just a few well known examples from one sport, baseball. Several World Cup climbing competitors have had medals stripped for cocaine or marijuana use. Even more dangerous (and interesting to the discussion) is the ease with which someone who climbs outside can use the drugs undetected, and subsequently earn money and support from companies for ascents climbed while using steroids. Is it naive to think that no climber has ever used anabolic steroids to enhance their performance on the rock? Should steroids be “allowed” in outdoor rock climbing? Is there, or should there be, anything done to try and stop this inevitability?

According to a publication cited in Wikipedia, steroid use can increase strength performance 5-20%, depending on the amount used and the duration, and that the upper body muscles, particularly the vastus lateralis and the trapezius muscle were the muscles measured to exhibit the greatest increase in muscle fiber size. Almost every climber uses caffeine, which is unquestionably a performance enhancing drug. Why then should steroids be any different? Where is the line drawn? Are any climbers today using steroids or other illegal performance enhancing drugs?

Will the heroes of climbing fall as they have in almost every major sport? It would be a sad day to see it happen, and I would be disappointed to see our sport go the way of so many others. Thoughts?

48 Responses to “Steroids”

  1. The Truth

    30. Jun, 2011

    I would use them, I have tried finding HGH (a safer form) but the cost is to high and with regulations hard to get. I am planing on competing in the ABS nationals this year and will be blood doping for that event.

  2. Scott Strong

    30. Jun, 2011

    When increased monetary return is promised, people will do whatever they feel is necessary in order to be a step above the competition. I think it’s the nature of competitive sports in general to try our best to get an edge. While it would be saddening to see such things happen, with the rewards becoming bigger and bigger, I imagine that we will see steroid use start to creep into competitive climbing.

    There are already professional climbers that have performance product endorsements. Nutriex comes to mind. Products like Crank claim to give an edge. I’m actually surprised that there aren’t more climbers taking advantage of the supplements that are available in the market.

    A way to incentivize not cheating has to be developed. Like creating a separate category of those who choose to use drugs like HGH or various steroids in order to get an edge. But reward those people with less money. Without the incentive to cheat, people will be less likely to do so. Outlawing cheaters and punishing cheaters works, sometimes.

    But with sports, the rewards greatly outweigh the risks so it’s a no brainer for a lot of athletes. The risk has to outweigh the reward.

  3. big poppa chosscrush

    30. Jun, 2011

    OMG! as soon as i’m done making spawn, i’m totally going to get JUICED!

    i’ve been told that the major benefit of steroids is that your body can recover much faster from strenuous exercise. so you can kill it out on the stone, rebuild, and kill it again the next day, while building strength rather that just ripping up muscle fibers that take days to regrow.


    the idea brings a tear of joy…

  4. Too High

    30. Jun, 2011

    Many bouldering enthusiasts would agree that climbing a hard problem (specifically problems that are near an individual’s limit) wouldn’t be legitimate if the climber was using steroids to gain strength. But if it was a first ascent…….then it would technically have to be accepted as a completed line and that person would have the right to name and grade the problem.
    Also what about non-typical drugs??? I can take adderall and climb all day with no fatigue…and if I have beta….then its waayyy easier than normal!
    Or what about rolling joints with sticky weed then slapping some slopers… the possibilities are endless!!

  5. Anthony

    30. Jun, 2011


    Why stop at roids? How about testing for THC? Or perhaps we would lose half of the top performers in the industry. If anything maybe you should ask that we start there to help clean up the sport. Honestly, I am indifferent at the moment. But, positive role models many of our athletes are not, hell one of our living legends has been quoted after being stripped of their medal stating “I did not know THC was a performance enhancing drug.” and those same athletes are rolling in sponsorships, but that is not even considered out of place. Lets take small steps first.

  6. maybe

    30. Jun, 2011

    Who doesn’t know people that aren’t taking aminos or creatine. If people will develop eating disorders to get a theoretical edge then steriod use is problably more prevelant than you would guess.

  7. big poppa chosscrush

    30. Jun, 2011

    if a first ascentionist determines the ethics and style for ascending a climb, and the FAist is juiced, does that mean that all subsequent ascentionists must use juice? if someone repeats it, would it be credited as the first non-juiced ascent?

    maybe we should all take juice, or, maybe only the ascents of people over 50 should count in climbing since by that age all the juice users will be dead from heartattacks?

    i think that the concept of doping will be no easier to handle in climbing than in other sports where the debates rage on.

    if rock climbing continues to bore the general public, i doubt that there will be enough money in the sport to make this practice too widespread.

    hell, the majority of climbers won’t even shell out full cost for a pair of premium climbing shoes.

    we’re cheap. steroids are not.

    maybe our dirtbaggery will be our salvation.

  8. mark

    01. Jul, 2011

    Less weight is way more of a benefit. With steroids, you get stronger but also much bigger, so you have more weight. It will never be a problem in climbing as super hard problems are more about core tension then pulling power and more pulling power with steroids means more weight. Not to mention the redistribution of body weight, body movement and technique involved.

  9. cardboard_dog

    01. Jul, 2011

    I absolutely believe that the new generation are taking steroids.

    Let me just say this… Using Roids to send is as gay as a f#$king power spot. As a matter of fact .. it is a power spot. DAB DAB DABBERY. Dabbity.

    THe UFC is full of roid heads, and, although you might assume that a fighting sport would be, the reality is that many UFC fighters shun the use of steroids and adapt a solid training routine. The better, more soul based fighters are looking for longevity and to know what they are honestly capable of doing.. Something you can’t know if you are taking steroids. Another draw back is that you can’t consistently take steroids .. you have to skip cycles occasionally to avoid major problems .. and when the fighters that were winning on roids end up getting their asses kicked in between cycles by a nobody, it’s usually a career killer.

    This will happen in climbing. plus the fact that steroids are hell on your tendons.

  10. Juan

    01. Jul, 2011

    All this part of the side effects of making an “effort” to make the sport grow. Not just more crowded crags and bouldering areas, which would lead to closure of some (i.e. Roadside at the RRG) but also a bigger industry.

    Sure, some people will be able to make a decent living from climbing (not just competing), and others may start getting fat checks from sponsors as they prove that they can create markets.

    The issue is the big pool of aspiring and hungry athletes that would most likely do whatever it takes to get to the top.
    Once there is a slight rumour that someone making a podium in Nationals or World Cup is on the juice, everyone else will get on it.

  11. mervo

    01. Jul, 2011

    I juiced and it got me to V3! PSYCHED!!!!

  12. Dave McAllister

    01. Jul, 2011

    The use of steroids is a certainty in the climbing world, in my opinion, at some point in the future in some corners of the climbingverse. It’s in every facet of life, every sport, for a variety of reasons. I thought you might enjoy the following, Jamie.

    Last year when Mike Brooks and I interviewed John Long on ClimbTalk, he talked about his one dance with steroids:

    Mike Brooks: Hey, John. Can I ask you anything; yes or no?

    John Long: Yeah, yeah.

    MB: Did you take steroids?

    JL: I actually tried them for about six months after I was out of climbing. I was pretty cautious. My dad, who has passed away since, I went to him and go, “Hey, I live in Venice and Gold’s Gym is down the street and I’m in there all the time now and I got a bunch of friends who are doing this and I’m sort of curious, maybe I could try this.” He goes, “Yeah, okay.” So, he gave me a prescription and I tried it and bulked up.

    But I’ll tell you one thing for sure, interesting, and that is, there’s a reason why those things are illegal. I discovered why, and it isn’t because they don’t work. I mean, you get strong as a freakin’ black bear on those things in no time. It is absolutely crazy how strong you get on those. And that was just doing a fairly moderate dose, nothing over the top, and I quit after one cycle. I just wanted to see what it was like. It doesn’t stay with you or anything. During that time, man, it was an unbelievable experience. I’m glad I did it.

  13. Ian

    01. Jul, 2011

    Is there routine testing for steroid use in climbing competition? Realistically testing for Synthetic Hormones would have to take place throughout the year to be even remotely useful as athletes use them during preparatory training cycles and cycle off to “Pass” tests before an event. There is a lot of money in climbing competition now, and has been for quite some time in Europe. its not like these athletes would be paying for their own Gear, much too expensive. Perhaps a little “better climbing through chemistry” experiment, paid for by sponsors is more likely? Get real Holmes! Steroids are already in use in climbing it’ll just be a while before anyone will admit it…

  14. Ian

    01. Jul, 2011

    @cardboard… HGH can be used quite consistently to support training and recovery without “Major Problems”. One of the primary benefits of HGH is its positive effect on connective tissue resilience. Also, the positive effects of synthetic testosterone on performance can be maintained with proper off-cycling but it seems like a complex and nasty hormonal medley is required.

  15. Chris

    01. Jul, 2011

    I fail to understand why only a few people posting here can´t take a serious and thought provoking post as serious as it should be.
    As with any sport, there should be tests…as with any sport, people will beyond doubt try to cheat their way through the system, slip through the net and succeed. That doesn´t mean that no effort should be made, though! If other sports have lost the battle against illegal performance enhancing drugs, why us the euphemism, let´s call it doping, that doesn´t mean that climbing shouldn´t at least try to maintain some integrity.

  16. lulz

    01. Jul, 2011

  17. Matt

    01. Jul, 2011

    I feel like using steroids/performance enchancing drugs goes against the principles of climbing. Indoor’s is where the competitiveness lies within climbing and, to some degree, it is understandable as to WHY someone would want to use steroids. However, taking it to bouldering/climbing outside is foolish and disappointing and realistically causes all respect for the user to be lost.

    Steroid use is an ethical question. Always has been and always will be. I can’t explain what climbing outside means because it is different to every individual. But if you care so much as to take steroids to climb the hardest line on the planet, I think you may need to get your priorities in order.

    Besides, performance enhancing drugs, steroids in particular, are just shortcuts. You can become just as strong without them, it just takes longer. Personally, I’ve walked in to a gym, have seen huge guys obviously jacked up on something, and I’m stronger than them in many ways. I have a stronger core, can do more pull-ups, can run faster and longer, etc… Who cares if I can’t bench as much as they can? Bench-press has no real application in life (unless you get stuck under a car?) Reason I am as strong as I am is through dedication when I was a swimmer and worked out a ridiculous amount (up to 12 workouts a week at times) for 6 years of my life and climbed almost everyday after those 6 years.

    Also, saying ” Almost every climber uses caffeine” is silly. I’ve never heard of that and personally avoid it when I am working out or go to a competition. I realize you said “Almost every,” but comon…. I doubt the statistic is no higher than the # of climbers that drink soda/pop/coffee/tea/energy drinks regularly simply because they enjoy the drink, not because they are doing it to improve their climbing.

  18. slabdyno

    01. Jul, 2011

    juicebags lose on the strength to weight ratio. haven’t seen a meat head on a comp podium since i can remember. looks like climbings elite are more likely to abuse diet pills.

  19. Ben

    01. Jul, 2011

    I didn’t read every comment so this may have been covered, but steroid use in climbing for the most part is going to be irrelevant. Of course the strength gain is going to help a small amount, but there’s no way a person who climbs average say around v6-v9 is going to get juiced and start giving dwoods or probinson a run for their money. For example I have friends who have been bouldering several years they can do numerous 1 arm pullups on small edges on the moon board and hold front levers, but get spit off v6. Then I have friends who look like spaghetti noodles and can climb double digit. Not to mention the fact that most steriod are harsh on tendons.

  20. Scott

    01. Jul, 2011


    Different kinds of steroids do different things. Endurance athletes use all kinds of performance enhancing drugs to up the bloods ability to take-up oxygen, clear out lactate, etc. Things that can definitely be applied to climbing. Just because someone’s juicing won’t make them big.

  21. Danny B

    01. Jul, 2011

    Steroids, as well any performance enhancing drug is something of concern. The movement of climbing is continuing to shift into a competitive sport, with that comes drugs as others have stated. To hold the power and saying (you can’t use this drug… but you can use this one) would surely cause a problem for our young sport. Who choices to put a higher power into what we all do naturally and for the love of the sport?

    What about the line drawn on what gear we use to ascend a problem or rock wall? Who okays the Knee Pad made of climbing rubber, or the rubber tipped golf gloves Kris Linder designed for deep water soloing? Does this mean that I can design a full body Rubber Climbing suit to get me safely through a Fat Crack climb with little effort? What about designing my own shoe with rubber hooks on the ends so I can literally hook my toes into pockets while roof climbing?

    It’s all worth discussion and opinions. I see cut corners and small gaps where the sport will continue to develop with crooked means. Often a grown sport has a Higher Power to decide what barriers we receive. Its just when this will take place and at what cost?

  22. big poppa chosscrush

    01. Jul, 2011

    none of this really matters.

    in fact, the only value of pro-climbers is to establish lines commensurate with my personal abilities. everything else is worthless, boring, and a waste of media.

    therefore, if folks use juice to push the limits even farther from my own grasp, it is a fruitless effort.

    maybe the pros need to reconnect with the soul of the sport (i.e. MY enjoyment) and remember the universal truth that their worth is determined by me and people like me.

    differently said and circling back to my point, if climbing is an art form, then like art, the only public value is determined by the public itself. otherwise, it’s just a sad old frenchman playing with colors. who cares? so, if folks are known to use drugs unacceptable by the internet lynch mob to enhance their performance, then the internet lynch mob can get to work on killing that climber’s credibility and media value like seems to be so easily done in other “ethical” climbing situations.

    now, go clean new lines for me, you worthless pukes!

    you have 2.5 weeks.

  23. big poppa chosscrush

    01. Jul, 2011

    to expand a tad further…. climing tends to be uniquely sensitive to the opinions of the general climbing public.

    public shaming can have substantial impacts.

    cases in point: dean potter. richard simpson.

    whether you agree or disagree with the scarlet letters placed on these gentleman by the public, the fact is that the public was directly responsible for the loss of support by major sponsors.

    the influence and general hate of the climbing community can be a very powerful and effective tool compared to other professional sports or even the cokehead/prostitute indescretions of politicians like JFK. in these other realms, public figures seem to get away with much more.

    sometimes, it seems like even good-intentioned climbers get caught in the undertow of online hate.

    it shouldn’t be too hard to raise a hue and cry to pummel down blatant juicers.

    if anyone wants to start policing, “WizQuiz” does a pretty good job for a decent price per test.

    be sure to pring plenty of sample cups!

  24. Ian

    02. Jul, 2011

    Sooooo, Anyone out there Juicing? It’s the internet, kingdom of anonymity! You don’t have to tell us who you are!

  25. cardboard_dog

    02. Jul, 2011

    It really isn’t a worthless ethical debate. Steroids are a major f#$king dab. Excuse the language but if you drop because your foot dabbed the pad, and you feel like your ascent was invalid, and you need to reclimb the line “clean” then jeebus .. how can you not consider Steroids a major DAB?? It’s so friggin invalid it’s practically the definition of invalid.

    If you have to take steroids to climb V14, then YOU ARE NOT A V14 ClIMBER. And you didn’t climb the line. The ‘Roids power spotted you through a climb that you were incapable of sending. Totally Invalid. Really whats the point. I guess it all lies in your motivation for climbing in the first place. If making a living is your primary goal than using unethical means of achieving that goal aren’t going to be as big an issue for you. Or conversely if your only concern is media or that people see you climbing hard, no matter what the method, than you are probably not going to give a shit about the unethical implications to using steroids. But if your goal is a personal one, than using steroids makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Like a politician who becomes a politician to make a difference, but takes corporate donations to fund his campaign, he’s lost before he even takes office. Pointless.

  26. james

    02. Jul, 2011

    I think the PED drug debate is something which will become a more common occurance the further climbing pushes itself towards mainstream sport.

    Firstly concerning mainstream sports. Pretty much all mainstream sports are completely flooded with PEDs. The products vary with each individual sport, but since the very first olympics, competitors have been taking one drug or another. In some sports, atheletes are tested constantly (ie cycling), which in turn results in the greatest number of positives. This perversely tarnishes the image of that particular sport to a far greater degree than those sports which test sporadically and when positives do turn up, simply sweep them under the carpet (this is case in the majority of sports but tennis and soccer spring to mind). Image is everything to keep the money flowing.

    In the past a large number of climbers have taken a vast array of drugs to aid their climbing in one way or another, such as speed, cocaine, weed, caffiene, small amounts of alchohol and so on. How much these drugs helped or actually hindered is uncertain, but what is unquestionable is that it has always carried on.

    To bring this back to the discussion (sorry for the digression), as climbing continues to become more popular and mainstream, the more PEDs will become prevailent. I think though that steriods are merely the tip of the iceberg.

    Off the top of my head (though there will be hundreds more)and to a greater or lesser degree of usefullness; I think HGH and certain steriod variants will be useful (the bulking up argument is flawed, there are numerous types of steroid which would suit climbing), clenbuterol and its variants, ephedrine and all the variants of speed(including high doses of caffiene), beta blockers and its variants and so on.

    Excuse my rambling post and spelling mistakes, discard anything you feel is rubbish.

    I will leave on this note though…Any sport, which is of a competetive nature (all sports?) will have drug taking involved somewhere, It is simply human nature…..which is doubly true once money is involved.

  27. Eric Crews

    02. Jul, 2011

    If you really want to read about the effects of performance-enhancing drugs check out this great article in Outside Magazine:

    It’s well worth a look…

  28. Ian

    02. Jul, 2011

    What’s wrong with someone who wants to perform at a higher level? Especially if they’re not SPRAYING, trying to get attention or “Grow the sport”. Perhaps they are just supporting recovery so they can enjoy more time spent doing the things that stoke them, like climbing hard on the small rocks, going big in the mountains and any other supplementary training that may give them pleasure. Do you like to climb at your limit? What if your work is a taxing physical task? Can you support recovery from your responsibilities AND your recreation? It becomes a legitimate problem… Recovery ability begins to decline in the mid twenties. Growth hormone production declines. This is only compounded in the fourth decade of life when Testosterone production begins to decline significantly. Is it a dab if you were prescribed the hormones by a physician? If you really care that much about what someone is choosing to do for personal enjoyment, perhaps you are a dick.

  29. joeyjoejoe

    02. Jul, 2011

    Ian, you are clearly pretty sensitive on the subject. Nobody is talking about whether it is okay for average joes and schmoes on the internet to use steroids. The debate is about whether vanguard athletes, the people companies sponsor and use as the face of their products, should be able to use steroids. To me the answer to that question is pretty clear: steroids need to be banned, at the very least in competition settings, in order to ensure a level playing field. Anytime anyone does anything to give themselves a personal advantage in an otherwise level playing field is CHEATING – it is pretty much the definition of cheating. Yes, some people are born with better genes than others, and these genes give them an advantage over others, but that is the nature of human competition (and not just in sports). To use steroids is a short step away from simply strapping on bionic legs and arms.

  30. lukas

    02. Jul, 2011

    if anyone has not already understood waht about jamie was talking about. it is not just thtat’s it is about ethics and being breave and humble. Steroids or HGH are hormons that do not just improve your recovry or strengths. they have severe effects on your body and health improving for example the possibility to get an cancer or a cardiomegaly as they let everything grow faster. there is of course a reason why so many professionel athletes in other sports die very young.
    keep on cimbing and having fun

  31. Justin

    03. Jul, 2011

    If taking some form of Steroid or HGH would help me repair damaged connective tissue, with no tangible strength benefit, I would absolutely take them. Of course, the prices of these drugs could prove to be a prohibitive factor.

    As a non-professional I don’t have any incentive to get stronger with the help of drugs, I love the challenge of hard climbing and that’s enough. It would be nice though to limit the amount of climbing days I’ll miss out on due to injuries over the course of my life. If PED’s can do that then sign me up.

  32. Michael Rathke

    03. Jul, 2011

    Ever since I put my spraydar away I like using my fool dar, but now I need a new motherboard for this dar because fools were Tryinta Spray

  33. cardboard_dog

    03. Jul, 2011

    Did I just called a dick? @ Ian .. I always appreciate another point of view. You seem to hold yours as strongly as I do. I do enjoy climbing at my limit. At MY limit. That to me means climbing as strong as I can without drugs, or bionic arms, or power spots. I have a job that is very physically taxing.. I am a carpenter and a contractor. My work is like an 8 hr workout some days. I simply have to find time to train and recover and climb as well rested as I can, when I can. I got into this game at 30 so I fully understand the relationship between rest and recovery and being able to perform at your highest level at an advanced age.. It gets much harder as you get older, but that battle is half the fun for me.

    I really don’t give a shit what other people do for personal enjoyment. Some people like to have sex with stuffed animals. It really has no effect on my life whatsoever. But I do feel like I have the right to feel strongly about something, and this is one of those things. If I were to use steroids I would never do it in a competition setting. I think it’s unethical. Some people are long and strong and have a serious strength to weight ratio and man thats not fair, but climbers like Chris Sharma and D. Woods have proven that being long is not an unfair advantage.

  34. John

    03. Jul, 2011

    i think steroids should be mandatory in ever sport….. would make them more intense and way less people would get in trouble.

  35. Jack

    03. Jul, 2011

    Steroids would add strength and mass, but too much of it would also go to lower body muscles. I think that this added weight either wouldn’t enable climbers to maintain the strength to weight ration then need, or it would simply stress the connective tissue to much and expedite injury.

  36. g

    04. Jul, 2011

    “steroids need to be banned, at the very least in competition settings, in order to ensure a level playing field.”

    the irony here is that according to at least one serious sports sociology study i know of, in some cases PED are a sort of professional insurance.

    sport : pro cycling.
    when : a few years ago, maybe today as well.
    how it works : as you approach the pro career, you can choose to dope and become a pro, or not to dope and quit (“clean and pro” is not an option, you wouldn’t be fast enough even with good genes).
    Shortly put, this discourages, say, 9 out of 10 pro-wannabees (similarly to other sacrifices one nedds to make to become a pro).
    The remaining 1 out of 10 who made the choice of being drug-fueled pros see less potential concurrents coming in each year, this alone makes their career a bit safer.
    Moreover, thanks to PED they can keep aging at bay for a while and quit at 40 rather than at 35.

    In the end, for the athlete who accepts the system, it makes for 15 years as a pro rider and better perspectives to find a job in the same industry once they quit, while if the sport was “clean” most folks would last 5 years before being outperformed by some newbie…

    btw, the playing field is more or less level anyway because it is a leveled and somehow scientifically controlled PED use…

  37. nc boys

    05. Jul, 2011

    there were some NC boys that were juicing. They thought folks had no clue but it was pretty obvious.

    You gotta have little respect for yourself if you take steriods then celebrate sends like you put so much “effort into it”

  38. bongowurm

    06. Jul, 2011

    Too High has a point

  39. mlloyd

    06. Jul, 2011

    info on caffeine as a performance enhancers

  40. bones

    06. Jul, 2011

    the thing that really surprised me… climbers making 6 figures?? really?? where?? in pesetas maybe…

  41. B3

    07. Jul, 2011

    I know there are several climbers around the world making over $100,000 a year.

  42. mlloyd

    07. Jul, 2011

    sharma got a 150,000 for 3 year contract with evolve… and that doesnt include petz and prana and profits from big up films. dolla dolla bills yawl… let the fight for table scraps comence.

  43. bones

    10. Jul, 2011

    150k for 3 years for the biggest athlete in the sport from one of his 2 main sponsors is… well, relatively peanuts. And sharma is the biggest name in climbing by a mile.

    Several climbers around the world making over 100k doesn’t really equal “top athletes making well over 6 figures” as nice a thought as it might be.

    Don’t get me wrong, i think the lack of big money is a good thing as it keeps climbing full of people who are in it for the love. The day Nike throws their weight in, everyone is going to be reminiscing about the good old days!

  44. savagehenry

    15. Jul, 2011

    So let’s hear it. Where are all the success stories? Where are all the climbers who have taken some kind of roid and went from 5.12 to 5.13 or 5.14 to 5.15? first hand experience here people come on.. Can it even help you make that kind of gain before you need to stop? if so, what were you on and where can I find it?

  45. Jim

    29. Jul, 2011

    I feel like testing at the competitive level might become necessary at some point (hopefully not). Aside from that, who cares what people are doing outside? If a first ascent is done by someone on roids, so be it. It doesn’t make the climb any less difficult. As someone else mentioned, athletes tend to turn to drugs to give themselves an edge, because they need to perform at their best if they wanna get paid. It would seem that a lot of ‘outdoor’ climbers don’t dabble in competition too much and likely wouldn’t be as likely to go the drug route.

  46. _D_

    09. Feb, 2012

    It’s only a matter of time before PEDs are widespread in climbing. Climbing is exploding in popularity right now.

    More climbers = more money in the industry = more competition and greater contracts for the top pros.

    Anabolic steroids for strength, amphetamines for fat loss, blood doping for high altitude work. You could argue that climbing is the PED chemist’s dream sport.

  47. Joe

    04. Sep, 2013

    I used and went from v3/4 to v7/8 and 5.10b/c all the way to 12b !!! What’s better I hardly if seldom felt any soreness and recovered 4 times as fast – all this from a very mild dose of test. I did gain 8-10lbs muscle lost 2 lbs when came off and the weight was distributed in all muscles concerned – my calves, forearms, biceps, shoulders, lats and abs all benefited. Im not saying hey go do em and they’re for everyone but I can say I benefited greatly being in my late 30’s it made sense as natural test begins to decline in most males. You do have to follow protocol in order to recover natural test and yup there y have it !

  48. joe

    25. Jul, 2014

    It’s possible to look at corporate sponsored sport as competition for marketing contracts. Seen this way, the primary concern for limits on what will be innovated to win is maintaining marketability. This scenario means we MUST ASSUME that drug use will (already is actually) be a prime contributor to the top performer. Pro level sports (by law imho) should be required to state they are playing in a state of “rational game contamination” whereby it is unrealistic for a participant or spectator to be under the impression that the participants are not using performance drugs.

    Only by declaring the pro level and most hyped sponsored competitions as contaminated can non professional competitions hope to gather interest.

Leave a Reply